This is all pointless anyway. Nothing will come of this inquiry and we of the few "loud minority" will never have unlocked/ unencrypted boot-loaders on VZW as a whole. Yes, I know the Nexus is unencrypted, but that was more an exception than the rule. If I had to bet I'd say this is probably the last Nexus type phone we will ever see on VZW.
How can Verizon make that claim to the FCC, while they offer the Nexus?
If they want to take the stance that unlocked bootloaders interfere with service delivery or compromise the network integrity, fine, but then don't allow some phones to be unlocked but not others. I think that all one would have to do is show the FCC the Galaxy Nexus and they would see that VZW obviously isn't concerned with unlocked bootloaders...
I would love to have the phone number in that letter and speak to this jack-off personally. Specifically asking him if he's ever heard of the Nexus on his network. It would be great to say something along the lines of "Why do the RAZR, Rezound, and Nexus have locked bootloaders?" to which he might reply with this garbage statement, at which time you could clarify that you neglected to mention that the Nexus IS unlocked...then play a sound-bite of crickets in the background as he tries to offer up credibility to his bogus reasons he JUST stated 30 seconds prior. Give me his number please ;-)
She can be reached here:
Acting Chief, Consumer Inquiries and Complaints Div.
Federal Communications Commission
Consumer and Governmental Affairs Bureau, 445 12th Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20554
^ excellent - i was too lazy to find her contact info ;-)
It is definitely worth sending her an email and seeing if anything comes of it. If that fails, there is always a phone number...
I wonder if someone (me?) were to draft a response email to this and we took a few days to massage it and make sure it didn't sound like whiney kids, if this would be something worth doing....thoughts?
"I am sure that this is not the first email that you have received on this topic. However, I recently read a letter that was published that showed Verizon refuting a complaint about locked bootloaders from a consumer.
I read their "defense", and if I did not know any better I would have concluded that their argument of network integrity and how "unlocked bootloaders can hinder the customer service experience that their customers expect"... Until I recalled that Verizon is the exclusive retailer of the Samsung Galazy Nexus, an unlocked Google phone.
So if I understand this correctly... Verizon claims that they require locked bootloaders for the above reasons, and yet they paid premium money to get the most anticipated and most widely sold UNLOCKED phone on the US market for their network?
Am I the only one who sees through their bogus argument?
The truth is that Verizon gets paid a lot of money to pre-load "bloat" software onto the phone whether consumers want it or not. They also load up a lot of their own bloat software to try to coerce you into using their peripheral "paid" services rather than the cheaper or even free alternatives that the open market provides.
Android is open-source. Verizon's attempts to lock down an open-source OS to prevent or at the very least coerce customers to purchase their services or block althernatives is something that needs to be looked at.
If they want to load up the phone with all sorts of stuff in the same manner that Dell does, so be it. But I am paying hundreds of dollars for the phone. I should be allowed to uninstall or change the things that I want, to use *my* phone in the manner that I see fit. If I have gone with the Galaxy Nexus, I would be able to do just that.
Thank you for your time.